Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser
First and foremost, there theists possess no burden of proof; It's the athiests who are challenging the existence of centuries old notion of God, so you must refute that claim and prove that God doesn't exist.
|
Why would Atheists be required to refute something that has not yet been established? The lack of burden for Theists is the basis for skepticism in Atheism.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser
Making a concrete assertion based on inconclusive/incomplete evidence is not only absurd but also isn't scientific in the least.
|
Its been said before, but I'll say it again. There is no proof of God's existence, and saying that science is absurd for pointing that out is, absurd.
I worship a Nilla Waifer which rules from a place called Nabisco, for instance. This snack exists in a dimension we cannot comprehend. Science is trying to tell me that because there is no proof of it's existence, it probably does not exist. I find science' judgement to be incorrect sense they cannot disprove the ruling cracker.
I have twenty-four H2 Hummers stacked ontop of one another in my front yard, next to a tree. This probably is untrue, but sense you have no idea what my financial situation is, or the assets I may, or may not posses, you cannot say for certain that there are not, in fact, twenty-four H2's in front of my house. That's Atheism.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser
Making a concrete assertion based on inconclusive/incomplete evidence is not only absurd but also isn't scientific in the least.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser
Any scientist worth his or her salt knows that science will never be able to qualify the existence of God, and to trying to do so is futile
|
Thank you for the contradiction.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser
So, until the day you can pull out some scientific evidence which states "God doesn't exist!", I'll take all atheist arguments with a grain of salt, as they have no logical basings
|
Explain the logic pertaining to faith. You're argument in favor of Theism could be pursuasive on a philosophical platform, but not in the faculty of reason.